Page 2 of 2

Re: Forge version 1.2.10 (or 1.3.0)

PostPosted: 11 Jul 2012, 12:31
by Chris H.
friarsol wrote:I just figured the ordering would be kept on the ftp site if we used double numbers (01 < 03 < 10) instead of (1 < 10 < 3). But if Maven doesn't like it, then there's no reason to do it.
 
Dave knows more about this than I do but on a best case scenario I see that I would have to:

1. Edit the pom file to state "1.3.00"

2. Execute the beta build and release Maven command. Maven would split the version number on the "." and add "1" to "00" and the result would be "1". The leading zero would be stripped. The beta would have a version number of "1.3.1".

3. Maven would then write the updated pom file to the SVN with the version number "1.3.1". I would then have to manually change the pom file to get the two digit version number for the following snapshot builds.

Dave and Rob have mentioned that we may do future snapshot builds with a cron job to automate the process. 8)

Re: Forge version 1.2.10 (or 1.3.0)

PostPosted: 11 Jul 2012, 15:23
by jendave
I do understand the concern about how the versions are listed in the ftp site. There may not be a good workaround for that. I'll see if I can find anything.

Chris - regarding your list, any build solution that has the phrase "manually change the pom file" is a bad one. :wink:

It would be great to use cron to automate the builds, but I just remembered the one caveat, the OSX build has to be run on a Mac. The Windows/Linux builds can be run on any machine however.

Dave

Re: Forge version 1.2.10 (or 1.3.0)

PostPosted: 11 Jul 2012, 15:47
by friarsol
Could we put the date of the release first, and then the Version number it might also do the trick in the filename?

(2012-06-25)_Forge_1.2.9.<ext>

Re: Forge version 1.2.10 (or 1.3.0)

PostPosted: 11 Jul 2012, 20:38
by silly freak
Since "Forge" does not change, Forge_2012-06-25_1.2.9 might be even better...

Re: Forge version 1.2.10 (or 1.3.0)

PostPosted: 11 Jul 2012, 20:50
by Jaedayr
My eyes are not as young as they once were, but I have to say it is really disconcerting to see the word pom in this discussion actually look like the word porn.

Chris - regarding your list, any build solution that has the phrase "manually change the porn 8-[ file" is a bad one

OK, we now resume our normal thread discussion, already in progress. :)

Re: Forge version 1.2.10 (or 1.3.0)

PostPosted: 11 Jul 2012, 21:30
by Chris H.
Once my wife and I finish our upcoming move I will need to have eye surgery performed and hope that things will work out OK.

Oh, Eclipse will open the pom file using a really nice editor which makes it fairly easy to update the version number by hand when it is needed.

In the past I did this when we updated the version number from 1.1.xx to 1.2.xx. I am not aware of any way to make this type of change without using the "manually change the pom file" method.

Nonetheless, I am not volunteering to do this on a regular basis as it is too easy to eventually make a mistake and we want Maven to handle this as much as possible. :)